Skip to main content

What are some things that have changed when the group of men came back from the safari? (A sound of Thunder)

When the safari participants return, many things have changed in the year 2055, due to an act of carelessness on Eckels's part.


In Ray Bradbury's short story "A Sound of Thunder," Eckels, the main character, pays for a time travel safari to the Cretaceous period to hunt a tyrannosaurus rex. The safari guide, Travis, warns the participants not to leave the metal, anti-gravity path that has been laid by Time Safari, Inc., to ensure that nothing is touched in the past. When Eckels asks why Travis explains the chain reaction of events in great detail: 



"Eventually, it all boils down to this: Fifty nine million years later, a cave man, one of a dozen in the entire world, goes hunting wild boar or saber toothed tiger for food. But you, friend, have stepped on all the saber toothed tigers in that region. By stepping on one single mouse. So the cave man starves. And the cave man, please note, is not just any expendable man, no! He is an entire future nation. From his loins would have sprung ten sons. From their loins one hundred sons. And thus onward toward civilization." 



Despite the detailed warnings, Eckels becomes so awestruck and afraid when he sees the tyrannosaurus rex, that he steps off the path and into the jungle moss. In doing this, he killed a butterfly, which changed the course of human history through a chain reaction of events. 


Some things that changed as a result of Eckels killing the butterfly were: the chemical taint to the air when he returned, the man sitting at the desk was "not quite the same," the spelling on the sign at Time Safari, Inc., had changed, and of course, the biggest change was that Deutscher, the anti-everything man, had been elected president instead of Keith. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.